What will it take for you to be satisfied with just one man?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2010 7:35 AM GMT
    for the love of man i cant answer this question....i see profiles on here and many of them have the open relationship caption on them. I dont get this..at all. I live in a city where....bed hopping is a favorite sport among its men...and i ask myself..if they dont get tired of doing this...so im asking you fellow gents....what will it take for you to really see and understand what it is to be in a monogamous relationship? Is is not achievable because of endless sexual conquest/possibilities? what will it take for you to be satisfied with just one man?
    041009_GayParents_hd.hmedium.jpg
    trio-bed-gay.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2010 7:52 AM GMT
    This topic has been addressed many, many times here. The guys in "open" monogamous relationships say that as long as there is consent between the partners, it is ok. Other men say, no way in hell!
    As for me, I say "hell no!"
    It is all a matter of personal choice. Some men need the stimulation that fresh meat provides. This is a given that will not ever change, no matter who they are with. Some cite differing sexual drives as well as practices not being met by their partners. Far be it for you or me to say what is right or wrong.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2010 8:02 AM GMT
    to be happy with a guy, he'd need to be able to satisfy me sexually and mentally by at least 60% (or there abouts) of what I need..

    I'm a little explorer in bed, I wanna try new things, do old things, have fun and a guy being to shy and scared of being vocal about what he wants and stuff is just not an enjoyable thing for me... But then, I'm also very happy with vanilla, I don't need it always to be like that, just need to be allowed too when the mood strikes

    And mentally, well that ones a harder thing to sum up, I need to be challenged sometimes, I get frustrated when someone will just lay down for me, I hate it and I enjoy fighting for what I want (even though it's not really fighting so much) I don't need arguments, infact I'm pretty good at making sure they aren't needed, but I need a guy who can be as strong as me and doesn't whine every time something goes wrong.

    I can be monogamous just as easily as I can be none-monogamous, so it's either or for me but I'm happier in a monogamous relationship when some of the stuff I need is fulfilled
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2010 11:56 AM GMT
    Just a few things
    1) We have a good sexual chemistry.
    2) We can enjoy each other as much as during sex as when just in each other's company.

    Not a big list but so far couldn't find anyone fitting the bill.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2010 12:57 PM GMT
    It will take me getting out of my own way and not thinking so much.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2010 1:20 PM GMT
    turbobilly saidThis topic has been addressed many, many times here. The guys in "open" monogamous relationships say that as long as there is consent between the partners, it is ok. Other men say, no way in hell!
    As for me, I say "hell no!"
    It is all a matter of personal choice. Some men need the stimulation that fresh meat provides. This is a given that will not ever change, no matter who they are with. Some cite differing sexual drives as well as practices not being met by their partners. Far be it for you or me to say what is right or wrong.

    I agree -- and we men seem to be "programmed" to behave in different ways from each other, which to the man concerned seem to be perfectly normal & innocent.

    For instance, I can only be with 1 man at a time; I simply lose all interest in other men, once I get close to some guy. And believe it or not, I get offers all the time (maybe fewer these days icon_redface.gif ) to play around, and they doesn't tempt me in the least bit. I joke to friends that it's my "magic switch" that automatically turns off when I settle down with a guy.

    And it would break my own heart if my partner was fooling around with other guys. But when I'm single with no particular BF, I can fuck around like a perfect slut all week long with no effort at all. The "switch" turns back on.

    And yet there are some men whose switch is on 24/7, 365, whether in a relationship or not. I don't admire that, but I guess that's the way they're built. And let's not limit this to gay men: straight men are the same way, just with women. Some are 100% faithful with their GF or wife, and some are Tiger Woods. icon_eek.gif

    Is there choice involved? Not always, like in my case. I choose nothing, it's just what I feel: switch on, switch off, automatic. Would I cheat with a partner if I had a totally-on switch? Don't know, hope not, but haven't been there.

    I would say, however, that I'm sure the cheaters are the more selfish guys, who think first & foremost about themselves, and less about the impact upon the other man in their lives, if at all. And even in ostensibly "open" relationships I really wonder if one of those guys is just agreeing to it to keep the other from running off.

    So maybe the best situation is to always have "switch on" and "switch off" guys paired up together, like with like. I'm just not sure how you can reliably know that beforehand. icon_question.gif
  • ATLANTIS7

    Posts: 1213

    Jan 19, 2010 1:47 PM GMT
    l am satisfied with the one l have and never wish for another
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2010 1:48 PM GMT
    Love.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2010 2:00 PM GMT
    All I need is to be loved unconditionally in return. If I am with you - then I am yours faithfully. No one else would ever be more important.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2010 2:05 PM GMT
    Unnatural
    Many authors criticize lifelong sexual monogamy as unnatural and unrealistic. They contend that humans have never been a sexually monogamous species, and that cultural expectations of sexual monogamy place enormous burdens on individuals to fulfill all the sexual needs of their partners. These expectations are quite unrealistic given how much variety exists in people's sexual desires and sex drives. In addition, sexual desires and sex drives can change over time due to circumstances (e.g., periods of high stress or poor health) and due to normal aging (e.g., changes in hormonal levels). Loving partners can find themselves mismatched in terms of their current sexual desires or sex drives. The failure to live up to unrealistic expectations of lifelong sexual monogamy causes people needless suffering.

    "But heterosexual genital love, which has remained exempt from outlawry, is itself restricted by further limitations, in the shape of insistence upon legitimacy and monogamy. Present-day civilization makes it plain that it will only permit sexual relationships on the basis of a solitary, indissoluble bond between one man and one woman, and that it does not like sexuality as a source of pleasure in its own right and is only prepared to tolerate it because there is so far no substitute for it as a means of propagating the human race. This, of course, is an extreme picture. Everybody knows that it has proved impossible to put it into execution, even for quite short periods."

    "None of the many restrictions that Christianity has placed upon sexual expression has been more highly valued--and more burdensome--than the doctrine that husband and wife must limit themselves sexually to each other from marriage until death. While our pious great-grandfathers may have regarded this as the natural and only moral way of life, it is so rare a pattern in anthropological and historical perspective that one is forced to consider it, if not unnatural, at least idiosyncratic and no more moral than any one of a hundred other alternatives.

    "Currently, monogamy is the only lovestyle style considered legitimate by our culture, even though the evidence clearly indicates that humans are not monogamous by nature. The reality is that the majority of husbands and wives have extramarital affairs and often get divorced as a result. In fact, one form of polygamy, often called serial monogamy, is now the most common form of relationship found in our culture. But divorce and remarriage are extremely stressful for children as well as their parents. Might there not be a better way? "

    "Monogamous couples are completely dependent on each other for affection and sex; and many become dissatisfied due to sexual incompatibilities, differences in level or frequency of sex, boredom with their sexual patterns. When they feel strong sexual attractions towards others they must repress these feelings or end their current relationship in order to have sex with someone else. Many complain bitterly that although they love their spouse and feel strongly attracted to him or her, the spouse doesn't want sex frequently enough or does not enjoy the same sexual activities. This leaves one partner always wanting more sex or more variety in sexual practices, and the other always feeling pressured for sex, often resulting in one partner having secret affairs with other lovers to fulfill their sexual needs.

    "Having looked, although briefly, at the diversity of human mateships, what can we conclude? For one thing, it seems undeniable that human beings have evolved as mildly polygynous creatures whose 'natural' mating system probably involved one man mated, when possible, to more than one woman. It is also clear that even in societies that institutionalized some form of polygyny, monogamy was nonetheless frequent, although, for men at least, this typically meant making the best of a bad situation. ...Certainly there is no evidence, either from biology, primatology, or anthropology, that monogamy is somehow 'natural' or 'normal' for human beings.

    Research supports the claim that lifelong sexual monogamy is unnatural and unrealistic. Biologists have strong evidence that social monogamy is rare among animals, and that sexual monogamy is even more rare, as most socially monogamous species are not sexually monogamous.

    It would be somewhat odd if people were sexually monogamous for life; Then again, people do many odd things in comparison to other animals. The fact that 80-85% of societies allow polygynous marriage further argues against the idea that sexual monogamy is built in to human nature.

    Studies of extramarital affairs and divorce provide evidence that lifelong sexual monogamy is unrealistic. Substantial numbers of people engage in extramarital sex.About half of married people in the United States divorce, and the majority of divorced people find new partners and marry again.Many people, perhaps the majority, simply do not live up to the expectation of lifelong sexual monogamy.
  • westdave

    Posts: 212

    Jan 19, 2010 2:14 PM GMT
    1.) he has to be a best friend and confidant
    2.) no fear of intimacy
    3.) physically fit (i.e. takes care of himself)
    4.) knows how to be humble and can laugh at his mistakes and himself
    5.) is on good terms with his family with being gay
    6.) he likes himself/has his act together, and baggage accountable
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2010 2:15 PM GMT
    1) conversation
    2) laughter
    3) honesty
    4) hawt sexy times

    in that order.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2010 2:29 PM GMT
    It takes a man that can meet my emotional, sexual, etc needs 60 percent or so of the time. A mate that can handle my strong personality and give some push back. That's a start.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2010 3:24 PM GMT
    Lukas4u saidUnnatural
    Many authors criticize lifelong sexual monogamy as unnatural and unrealistic. ...Biologists have strong evidence that social monogamy is rare among animals, and that sexual monogamy is even more rare, as most socially monogamous species are not sexually monogamous.

    Well, I see some potential flaws in that article. What MOST species do is not the yardstick for what ONE species does. Some birds, for instance, do mate for life. Within their species, it would be unnatural for them to be non-monogamous, and it's immaterial to them what other species do.

    So what does the human species do? The answer is complicated because human behavior is an amalgam of eons of recent and relatively rapid evolution, plus we developed culture along the way, something other species do not have, something that does not conform to the laws of evolution. Here's how I imagine things happened:

    In earliest human development, when people lived in small hunter-gatherer bands, the males probably spent a great deal of time away from the less mobile females and children. Permanent mating pairs did not exist, and it's doubtful whether fathers would have clearly known which children were theirs. Due to high mortality rates in all age groups, a communal parenting system would have been the most effective way to insure survival of the greatest number of children.

    As human numbers increased and village life developed around fixed agriculture, with specialization and division of labor, and more males permanently resided in the community, parenting pairs of a mother & father became more common. A mother & dependent child were less an amorphous communal responsibility, and became more reliant upon a solitary male mate.

    This in turn led to the natural selection of a male trait to bond with his mate & child, at least until his offspring was sufficiently independent to free the mother for other activities. Studies suggest this may be the root of the so-called "7-year itch," the point when modern men show a greater frequency of cheating in their marriages (the reality is closer to 4 years).

    [The assumption in this model is that the females would generally have surviving children aged at intervals greater than 4 years, which might not be enough to sustain a population experiencing high mortality rates and short life spans. Women in most primitive societies today give birth frequently enough to sustain a surviving sibling age interval of less than 4 years.]

    Increasingly complex societies would also have an interest in enforcing permanent mating pairs, in order to reduce infant mortality, to avoid a community burden, and to reduce internal conflicts with competing males. Justification of these strictures on religious grounds would have developed later, a rationalization and appeal to a higher authority, for what were basically practical societal matters.

    So that when the article states "None of the many restrictions that Christianity has placed upon sexual expression has been more highly valued--and more burdensome--than the doctrine that husband and wife must limit themselves sexually to each other from marriage until death" it is getting the order wrong, and confusing cause & effect. Lifetime marriage was not invented by religion, it was enforced by it, a condition society already wanted to impose. [And at a time when a person's normal expected lifetime was barely long enough to raise a child to full self-sufficiency.]
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Jan 19, 2010 3:52 PM GMT
    [quote][cite]Red_Vespa said...This topic has been addressed many, many times here. The I can only be with 1 man at a time; I simply lose all interest in other men, once I get close to some guy. And believe it or not, I get offers all the time (maybe fewer these days icon_redface.gif ) to play around, and they doesn't tempt me in the least bit. I joke to friends that it's my "magic switch" that automatically turns off when I settle down with a guy.

    And it would break my own heart if my partner was fooling around with other guys. But when I'm single with no particular BF, I can fuck around like a perfect slut all week long with no effort at all. The "switch" turns back on....Is there choice involved? Not always, like in my case. I choose nothing, it's just what I feel: switch on, switch off, automatic. Would I cheat with a partner if I had a totally-on switch? Don't know, hope not, but haven't been there...[/quote]

    my feelings exactly! my bf and i have tried a couple of mutually agreed on 3-ways...I suspect he (my bf) enjoyed the experiences a lot more than I did.

    I check out attractive/cute guys and think "he's cute, but he's not fitz (my bf)".

    perhaps not being in my 20's makes a difference in my emotional maturity level.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2010 4:51 PM GMT
    so after reading all your valued responses..i have come to the conclusion that sexual compatibility is the rooted substance that can determine the length of a true monogamous relationship. So if sex is the only thing that determines ones fidelity...what does that say about the Human Race? We cannot live and love without the influence of sex making us be appreciative and satisfied with just one partner? Im trying to figure this out as i examined all my family members and they have all cheated on their spouses...especially the men...and growing up i saw how devastating this could be...so i vowed i would not do so.
  • drypin

    Posts: 1798

    Jan 19, 2010 5:13 PM GMT
    tereseus,

    One thing I would caution about trying to find a formula is remembering that all of us change as the years go by. Few of us are the person we were when we were 20 or 30 or 40.

    And what we are looking for at 20 might no longer be fulfilling 20 years later. When we are lucky, two people in a relationship will change harmoniously as we grow. But this requires an enormous amount of work and I don't often see people doing the work in a relationship. Rather, I find that many couples - after a few years or decades - begin to take each other for granted, which is probably a sign that they aren't paying attention to how the other might be growing and changing.

    Cheating is almost always endemic of other problems in the relationship - otherwise, it wouldn't be cheating. Don't make the mistake of believing that those other problems are always the same ones.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2010 5:17 PM GMT
    I think people are satisfied with just one partner. They may truly be head over heels in love and want to spend the rest of their lives with that person...

    BUT

    having sex with one person the rest of your life is a hard concept to want to follow, especially when you are young 30 and below, you think to yourself,

    "How would I know if this guy the one for me, my whole life, if I don't experience other men."

    There are over 6 Billion people in the world and to limit yourself to 1 person, your whole life and your 1 and ONLY LIFE, is ridiculous in my point of view.

    I completely believe in relationships, but I completely understand if the partner wants someone else sexually once in a while because me, myself, can't see... I'm 21, but to find the love of my life and to end it and sleep with him for the rest of my life and NEVER experience anyone else is outrageous.
  • jperfit

    Posts: 593

    Jan 19, 2010 5:53 PM GMT
    Gay dudes are not capable of being in a monogamous situation for very long, they always think they can get something better and when they become old, decrepit and not as appealing then its much to late but this serves its purpose because if you go through life and base everything on looks, then you usually get what you are worthy of in the end.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2010 6:08 PM GMT
    drypin saidtereseus,

    One thing I would caution about trying to find a formula is remembering that all of us change as the years go by. Few of us are the person we were when we were 20 or 30 or 40.

    And what we are looking for at 20 might no longer be fulfilling 20 years later. When we are lucky, two people in a relationship will change harmoniously as we grow. But this requires an enormous amount of work and I don't often see people doing the work in a relationship. Rather, I find that many couples - after a few years or decades - begin to take each other for granted, which is probably a sign that they aren't paying attention to how the other might be growing and changing.

    Cheating is almost always endemic of other problems in the relationship - otherwise, it wouldn't be cheating. Don't make the mistake of believing that those other problems are always the same ones.



    Drypin, wise as always. You're absolutely right. I've seen very happy, monogamous, long-term relationships crash and burn because one or both parties changed over time and neither saw it nor acknowledged that complacency was quietly destroying their love. It takes work, even in the best of relationships.

  • DarkSensation

    Posts: 715

    Jan 20, 2010 9:16 AM GMT
    tereseus1 saidso after reading all your valued responses..i have come to the conclusion that sexual compatibility is the rooted substance that can determine the length of a true monogamous relationship. So if sex is the only thing that determines ones fidelity...what does that say about the Human Race? We cannot live and love without the influence of sex making us be appreciative and satisfied with just one partner? Im trying to figure this out as i examined all my family members and they have all cheated on their spouses...especially the men...and growing up i saw how devastating this could be...so i vowed i would not do so.


    Well there are few flaws to what you are saying....First I was raised in a family Dominated by women where all their men cheated and ended up in Divorce. You see with Straight couples, Once the women done having kids, they don’t have much interest in sex, don’t really take care of their bodies nor do they take care of their men Primarily. The problem with gays couple is that they can have sex more easily is not to easily than straight couples but they don’t have the Main distraction like kids..So they become bored with each other and seek sex with others to fill the void for the rest of their Days…………..so either way it is mess up, lol icon_lol.gificon_lol.gif
  • DarkSensation

    Posts: 715

    Jan 20, 2010 9:22 AM GMT
    PusiKuracBre saidI think people are satisfied with just one partner. They may truly be head over heels in love and want to spend the rest of their lives with that person...

    BUT

    having sex with one person the rest of your life is a hard concept to want to follow, especially when you are young 30 and below, you think to yourself,

    "How would I know if this guy the one for me, my whole life, if I don't experience other men."

    There are over 6 Billion people in the world and to limit yourself to 1 person, your whole life and your 1 and ONLY LIFE, is ridiculous in my point of view.

    I completely believe in relationships, but I completely understand if the partner wants someone else sexually once in a while because me, myself, can't see... I'm 21, but to find the love of my life and to end it and sleep with him for the rest of my life and NEVER experience anyone else is outrageous.


    As for you PusiKuracBre...Amen to what you Wrote, I Feel Exactly the same way. I'll Worry about Relationship in my 30's...but for Now, I want to Enjoy it with the Many Guys icon_lol.gif ...One Life to Live People..Dont Forget That icon_biggrin.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 20, 2010 10:27 AM GMT
    i think its hard to say what is human nature anymore. since humans have gone against their own nature for as long as clothes have been around.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 20, 2010 11:46 AM GMT
    tereseus1 saidso after reading all your valued responses..i have come to the conclusion that sexual compatibility is the rooted substance that can determine the length of a true monogamous relationship. So if sex is the only thing that determines ones fidelity...what does that say about the Human Race? We cannot live and love without the influence of sex making us be appreciative and satisfied with just one partner? Im trying to figure this out as i examined all my family members and they have all cheated on their spouses...especially the men...and growing up i saw how devastating this could be...so i vowed i would not do so.


    I haven't read all the posts in this thread but I also noticed a lot of sexually-focused responses. From my point of view, the physical is part of the mental connection. You need to be able to express yourself physically towards your partner and be able to appreciate and pay attention to each other.

    Problems arise, however, when sex becomes over-rated. Sure, there is the thrill when someone good-looking is flattering you in some way and it is easy to give in. In the end, we all have and make our own choices. This is so in homo- as well as heterosexual relationships. In my opinion, sex is in the mind to a large extend and we have and make choices as we go along in a relationship. What one has to accept is that there is always a giving and a taking, sometimes more from one than from the other but overall, there should be a balance and a willingness to compromise.

    A lot of people do not want to compromise and feel that it is a limitation of their own personal freedom, fair enough. As a second limitation is often the pressure from external sources. If society does not accept homosexuality and treat it equally in front of the law, reports have shown that relationships break up easier. In my own observations amongst friends - I am not sure if I can at all quantify that - homosexual couples that made it over the first couple of hurdles and years actually stay together whereas the heterosexual couples that got all the support from their environment to get married, have children, etc. start having difficulties being faithful and get divorced.. As a discussion aside, what does this tell us about 'external pressures'...?

    All in all, it is an interesting topic. I would not generalize this too much, though. There are a lot of people out there that live in harmonious and monogamous relationships and that don't advertise them. But most importantly, everyone lives as he/she pleases and I think, as long as one does not limit oneself by one's principles you will find what you are looking for. As for me, I am quite happy being married to my guy without the urge to 'eat out', share my life and experiences and be able to fully trust my partner. I feel home here and that to me is more important than mind-blowing sex every night, all year through (although there are times I would not mind icon_eek.gif, but I guess that's just in books and films... the 'happily ever after' is a bit different in reality). Know your expectations and manage them! Mistakes can happen, but they should not become an excuse to hide behind. Again, we are the masters of our own choices and responsible of our actions. If we can live with that, we should not be too surprised by what we get in return.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Jan 20, 2010 11:49 AM GMT
    Make me wanna .....

    * Come home from work each day

    * Hop into bed each night icon_cool.gif

    * Go out and be seen with him

    * Do something special for him